| Where do you stand ? 13:01 - Jan 6 with 1270 views | Crawfordsboot |
On Anti vaxers protesting outside schools and Sajid Javids home? |  | | |  |
| Where do you stand ? on 13:02 - Jan 6 with 1243 views | NthQldITFC |
On the neck or testicles probably. |  |
| # WE ARE STEALING THE FUTURE FROM OUR CHILDREN --- WE MUST CHANGE COURSE # | | Poll: | It's driving me nuts |
| |
| Where do you stand ? on 13:03 - Jan 6 with 1235 views | Herbivore |
Where do I stand? On their necks, preferably*.
*for the benefit of any softcocks, this is a joke and is intended as a hyperbolic expression of my disapproval of the behaviour of the anti-vaxxers rather than as a genuine desire to stand on their necks. |  |
| |
| Where do you stand ? on 13:04 - Jan 6 with 1225 views | NthQldITFC |
| Where do you stand ? on 13:03 - Jan 6 by Herbivore |
Where do I stand? On their necks, preferably*.
*for the benefit of any softcocks, this is a joke and is intended as a hyperbolic expression of my disapproval of the behaviour of the anti-vaxxers rather than as a genuine desire to stand on their necks. |
Haha, beat ya! ;) | |
| # WE ARE STEALING THE FUTURE FROM OUR CHILDREN --- WE MUST CHANGE COURSE # | | Poll: | It's driving me nuts |
| |
| Where do you stand ? on 13:04 - Jan 6 with 1236 views | J2BLUE |
Disagree with both.
I know it's not 'right' but anti vaxxers outside schools are just utter cretins. I would quite like the police to go in tooled up. Again, I know it's not 'right' but ffs.
*for the benefit of any softcocks, this is not a joke and is intended to be taken entirely seriously as an expression of my disapproval of the behaviour of the anti-vaxxers and indicates a genuine desire to see them take a good kicking. [Post edited 6 Jan 2022 13:05]
|  |
| |
| Where do you stand ? on 13:06 - Jan 6 with 1200 views | Herbivore |
| Where do you stand ? on 13:04 - Jan 6 by J2BLUE |
Disagree with both.
I know it's not 'right' but anti vaxxers outside schools are just utter cretins. I would quite like the police to go in tooled up. Again, I know it's not 'right' but ffs.
*for the benefit of any softcocks, this is not a joke and is intended to be taken entirely seriously as an expression of my disapproval of the behaviour of the anti-vaxxers and indicates a genuine desire to see them take a good kicking. [Post edited 6 Jan 2022 13:05]
|
The policing of anti-vax protests has generally seemed to be more light touch than policing of XR and Insulate Britain protests, and indeed the policing of the Sarah Everard vigil. One has to wonder why that might be. | |
| |
| Where do you stand ? on 13:07 - Jan 6 with 1172 views | footers |
| Where do you stand ? on 13:04 - Jan 6 by J2BLUE |
Disagree with both.
I know it's not 'right' but anti vaxxers outside schools are just utter cretins. I would quite like the police to go in tooled up. Again, I know it's not 'right' but ffs.
*for the benefit of any softcocks, this is not a joke and is intended to be taken entirely seriously as an expression of my disapproval of the behaviour of the anti-vaxxers and indicates a genuine desire to see them take a good kicking. [Post edited 6 Jan 2022 13:05]
|
Pah. These people are spreading dangerous misinformation about a global pandemic, not holding a vigil for an innocent woman killed by a copper. The police are powerless. |  |
| |
| Where do you stand ? on 13:07 - Jan 6 with 1173 views | homer_123 |
| Where do you stand ? on 13:06 - Jan 6 by Herbivore |
The policing of anti-vax protests has generally seemed to be more light touch than policing of XR and Insulate Britain protests, and indeed the policing of the Sarah Everard vigil. One has to wonder why that might be. |
I guess this might be to do with the fact that they are more likely to catch Covid from this lot, so the Police keep their distance a bit more?  |  |
| |
| Where do you stand ? on 13:09 - Jan 6 with 1148 views | Herbivore |
| Where do you stand ? on 13:07 - Jan 6 by homer_123 |
I guess this might be to do with the fact that they are more likely to catch Covid from this lot, so the Police keep their distance a bit more? |
It could be, I'm absolutely certain that it's not remotely politically motivated. | |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Where do you stand ? on 13:10 - Jan 6 with 1139 views | Illinoisblue |
Water cannons and tasers need to be deployed. |  |
| |
| Where do you stand ? on 13:11 - Jan 6 with 1123 views | homer_123 |
| Where do you stand ? on 13:09 - Jan 6 by Herbivore |
It could be, I'm absolutely certain that it's not remotely politically motivated. |
Indeed, not in the slightest. | |
| |
| Where do you stand ? on 13:17 - Jan 6 with 1067 views | J2BLUE |
| Where do you stand ? on 13:10 - Jan 6 by Illinoisblue |
Water cannons and tasers need to be deployed. |
In that order. | |
| |
| Where do you stand ? on 13:30 - Jan 6 with 1012 views | BlueBadger |
Chat sh1t, get banged. It's harassment and intimidation, nothing. Let Old Bill let out their frustrations on people who deserve it for a change rather than peacefully protesting women and non-white people, it'll make everyone feel better.
*Disclaimer: May not be entirely my real opinion. Getting a kicking probably won't make the pro-diseasers feel better... [Post edited 6 Jan 2022 13:34]
|  |
| |
| Where do you stand ? on 13:33 - Jan 6 with 975 views | BlueBadger |
| Where do you stand ? on 13:10 - Jan 6 by Illinoisblue |
Water cannons and tasers need to be deployed. |
They should warm to water cannons up though, the dirty b*ggers probably aren't washing their hands properly. | |
| |
| Where do you stand ? on 13:40 - Jan 6 with 930 views | Swansea_Blue |
| Where do you stand ? on 13:10 - Jan 6 by Illinoisblue |
Water cannons and tasers need to be deployed. |
A bit harsh. I think people should be allowed to start whatever threads they want. |  |
| |
| Where do you stand ? on 13:40 - Jan 6 with 932 views | Crawfordsboot |
I believe that rights come with responsibilities. This example highlights the difficulty of reconciling the individuals right to protest with the wider rights of society not to be impacted in a significantly negative way by minority protestors.
For me anti vaxers (however deluded) have a right to express their views. Let them stand on a roundabout in the rain holding placards. However they have no right to intimidate others be they children, parents or politicians. | | | |
| Where do you stand ? on 13:41 - Jan 6 with 927 views | Eireannach_gorm |
| Where do you stand ? on 13:33 - Jan 6 by BlueBadger |
They should warm to water cannons up though, the dirty b*ggers probably aren't washing their hands properly. |
....... and add a bit of liquid soap.
Of course you could go the other way and use a Slurry Spreader as was done one time in this country. |  | | |
| Where do you stand ? on 13:43 - Jan 6 with 908 views | Crawfordsboot |
| Where do you stand ? on 13:40 - Jan 6 by Swansea_Blue |
A bit harsh. I think people should be allowed to start whatever threads they want. |
:) | | | |
| Where do you stand ? on 13:46 - Jan 6 with 886 views | chicoazul |
Nobody should ever be allowed to protest outside schools. Plenty of other spaces available for that. Outside a politicians home, well, don’t have a huge problem with that. |  |
| |
| Where do you stand ? on 13:52 - Jan 6 with 857 views | homer_123 |
| Where do you stand ? on 13:40 - Jan 6 by Crawfordsboot |
I believe that rights come with responsibilities. This example highlights the difficulty of reconciling the individuals right to protest with the wider rights of society not to be impacted in a significantly negative way by minority protestors.
For me anti vaxers (however deluded) have a right to express their views. Let them stand on a roundabout in the rain holding placards. However they have no right to intimidate others be they children, parents or politicians. |
Yet we readily allow religion to purvey in schools. | |
| |
| Where do you stand ? on 13:55 - Jan 6 with 847 views | footers |
| Where do you stand ? on 13:46 - Jan 6 by chicoazul |
Nobody should ever be allowed to protest outside schools. Plenty of other spaces available for that. Outside a politicians home, well, don’t have a huge problem with that. |
Even the tw@ttiest of politicians still deserve a right to privacy and security. Just like the dickheads who went to JRM's house. Totally unnecessary and could lead to much worse. | |
| |
| Where do you stand ? on 14:05 - Jan 6 with 814 views | factual_blue |
Let them parade their ignorance and stupidity, die from Covid, and improve the gene pool. |  |
| |
| Where do you stand ? on 14:15 - Jan 6 with 791 views | bluelagos |
So there's 3 questions.
What they are protesting, how they are protesting and where they are protesting.
I think they should be treated like all other protesters, including those I disagree with like say the EDL/BNP. So what they protest is down to them and I have no issue with them even though I disagree with their protests.
Where - is outside a school or a politicians home a problem? I don't see why, even if I don't like it.
How - this is where I do have an issue, if they are intimidating children and/or teaching staff. That should be managed by the police locally much as they would deal with other forms of intimidation/threats made by members of the public.
The suggestions (from many) that we should treat these protestors differently simply because we disagree with their views or arguments is just another example of how this virus has seen some incredibly extreme positions taken by people on a whole range of issues.
I don't like anti-vaccers but much like the far right, I think we are better country for allowing dissent, even when we disagree with it. Incredible how many ordinary people seem happy to go down the authoritarian route just because they don't like anti-vaccers.
Edit: I see others have made the point about politicians homes and recent attacks. Can see why that wouldn't be acceptable. [Post edited 6 Jan 2022 14:39]
|  |
| |
| Where do you stand ? on 14:18 - Jan 6 with 774 views | J2BLUE |
| Where do you stand ? on 14:15 - Jan 6 by bluelagos |
So there's 3 questions.
What they are protesting, how they are protesting and where they are protesting.
I think they should be treated like all other protesters, including those I disagree with like say the EDL/BNP. So what they protest is down to them and I have no issue with them even though I disagree with their protests.
Where - is outside a school or a politicians home a problem? I don't see why, even if I don't like it.
How - this is where I do have an issue, if they are intimidating children and/or teaching staff. That should be managed by the police locally much as they would deal with other forms of intimidation/threats made by members of the public.
The suggestions (from many) that we should treat these protestors differently simply because we disagree with their views or arguments is just another example of how this virus has seen some incredibly extreme positions taken by people on a whole range of issues.
I don't like anti-vaccers but much like the far right, I think we are better country for allowing dissent, even when we disagree with it. Incredible how many ordinary people seem happy to go down the authoritarian route just because they don't like anti-vaccers.
Edit: I see others have made the point about politicians homes and recent attacks. Can see why that wouldn't be acceptable. [Post edited 6 Jan 2022 14:39]
|
Nah. If you're trying to mentally poison children in the face of overwhelming scientific evidence that you are wrong then you deserve a good hiding. | |
| |
| Where do you stand ? on 14:21 - Jan 6 with 755 views | BlueBadger |
| Where do you stand ? on 13:55 - Jan 6 by footers |
Even the tw@ttiest of politicians still deserve a right to privacy and security. Just like the dickheads who went to JRM's house. Totally unnecessary and could lead to much worse. |
Two dead MPs in the past five years tells you where that leads. | |
| |
| Where do you stand ? on 19:01 - Jan 6 with 554 views | Crawfordsboot |
| Where do you stand ? on 14:15 - Jan 6 by bluelagos |
So there's 3 questions.
What they are protesting, how they are protesting and where they are protesting.
I think they should be treated like all other protesters, including those I disagree with like say the EDL/BNP. So what they protest is down to them and I have no issue with them even though I disagree with their protests.
Where - is outside a school or a politicians home a problem? I don't see why, even if I don't like it.
How - this is where I do have an issue, if they are intimidating children and/or teaching staff. That should be managed by the police locally much as they would deal with other forms of intimidation/threats made by members of the public.
The suggestions (from many) that we should treat these protestors differently simply because we disagree with their views or arguments is just another example of how this virus has seen some incredibly extreme positions taken by people on a whole range of issues.
I don't like anti-vaccers but much like the far right, I think we are better country for allowing dissent, even when we disagree with it. Incredible how many ordinary people seem happy to go down the authoritarian route just because they don't like anti-vaccers.
Edit: I see others have made the point about politicians homes and recent attacks. Can see why that wouldn't be acceptable. [Post edited 6 Jan 2022 14:39]
|
Nicely put Lagos and I like the three points you highlight.
However the difficulty is when you look into the “how”. Here again as in a number of discussions on this site we end up reviewing the rights and wrongs of direct action. Anti vaxxers or vaccers might believe in their direct action to intimidate teachers with dummy legal docs, or just scare children with their claims. Right to lifers might intimidate vulnerable women seeking an abortion. Climate activists might try to stop you using your polluting motorbike!
Personally I do not think protestors should be allowed to intimidate or obstruct individuals going about their lawful business. They should be free to protest in an effort to get their views accepted by society but no more than that.
That to me would be a good general principle. That said there is still room for the sort of outcome we see in the protest in Bristol. The actions of the four charged were illegal. They admitted their actions but a jury found that they did not wish to criminalise those actions because they the jury acting for the people deemed the actions appropriate and proportionate. I have no problem with that outcome, though it needs to be viewed as the exception and not the rule. [Post edited 6 Jan 2022 19:06]
| | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
